This is no-functional-change-intended.
This is repackaging the functionality of D30333 (defer switch-to-lookup-tables) and
D35411 (defer folding unconditional branches) with pass parameters rather than a named
"latesimplifycfg" pass. Now that we have individual options to control the functionality,
we could decouple when these fire (but that's an independent patch if desired).
The next planned step would be to add another option bit to disable the sinking transform
mentioned in D38566. This should also make it clear that the new pass manager needs to
be updated to limit simplifycfg in the same way as the old pass manager.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38631
llvm-svn: 316835
As discussed in D39011:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D39011
...replacing constants with a variable is inverting the transform done
by other IR passes, so we definitely don't want to do this early.
In fact, it's questionable whether this transform belongs in SimplifyCFG
at all. I'll look at moving this to codegen as a follow-up step.
llvm-svn: 316298
The missed canonicalization/optimization in the motivating test from PR34471 leads to very different codegen:
int switcher(int x) {
switch(x) {
case 17: return 17;
case 19: return 19;
case 42: return 42;
default: break;
}
return 0;
}
int comparator(int x) {
if (x == 17) return 17;
if (x == 19) return 19;
if (x == 42) return 42;
return 0;
}
For the first example, we use a bit-test optimization to avoid a series of compare-and-branch:
https://godbolt.org/g/BivDsw
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39011
llvm-svn: 316293
In cases such as the attached test, where the case value for a switch
destination is used in a phi node that follows the destination, it
might be better to replace that value with the condition value of the
switch, so that more blocks can be folded away with
TryToSimplifyUncondBranchFromEmptyBlock because there are less
conflicts in the phi node.
llvm-svn: 133344
Sanjay Patel